The Sphinx's Lair

12:26 AM

Some nice person downvoted eight of my answers within a period of about a minute, an hour or so ago. That seems rather too quick to be the result of careful consideration of their merits :-). Anyone else received similar treatment?

Nope, someone just loves you.

Excellent! It's nice to be loved.

Actually it's totally me - I'm going to keep downvoting your stuff until you lose an election point for rep. Don't tell the Mods. ;)

Good luck with that.

Nope, nothing here either. It'll probably be reversed soon.

12:36 AM

I expect so (though I don't know what policy is on this sort of thing).

serial vote detection kicks in

^

Actually I wonder how that works - I recall once going through the "Clues" series, which had reached the teens by that time I'm guessing, and upvoting ones I thought were good - that would likely have been a series of upvotes by the same user for puzzles of the same user in a short, but not unrealistically rapid, time frame. I wonder if those counted. If it reverts votes, does the voter get notified somehow?

Sconibulus

if you were voting a good mix of questions and answers, it may have been considered legitimate

Q: A 3-person hat puzzle (no, not that one) (no, not that one either!)

I suppose I could go look and see if I have upvotes still on them, but effort

Sphinx

12:43 AM

0

No, this puzzle isn't a duplicate of any of the well-known hat puzzles we all know. Yes, it does have a valid solution. This puzzle was originally composed by Jack Lance and posted to a friend group with different names. Deusovi, Rubio, and Boboquack are standing in a circle. From a bag of 2 red...

logical-deduction knowledge meta-knowledge hat-guessing

Oh my.

That one's a fun puzzle.

You test-solved it?

Yep.

I also suggested the other two names :P (he didn't have to change mine)

There are some slightly dubious assumptions there.

12:53 AM

damn. you just beat me to it

Though at least some of them may have been checked.

Sorry @Rubio

I suggest you downvote eight of my answers to compensate.

3

That is the solution, and in the name-suggesting process I checked the assumptions that were possible to check

Good!

Seeing as how I just upvoted that one, I guess I have to downvote even more now.

Careless!

12:54 AM

Indeed.

(namely, that gur bgure gjb xarj gung V jnf pbybeoyvaq, naq V jnfa'g. V qvq n ybg bs qvttvat guebhtu GFY, naq jnf bevtvanyyl tbvat gb fhttrfg lbh gjb, ohg jnfa'g fher vs Tnergu jnf pbybeoyvaq uvzfrys, be xarj nobhg zl pbybeoyvaqarff - ur unq arire zragvbarq vg bar jnl be gur bgure)

My algorithm is: Is answer crap? yes -> DOWNVOTE. no -> if not good, stop; else: Is it (Deusovi,Rand)? yes -> they don't need rep, move on. no -> Is it Beastly Gerbil? yes -> downvote, trying to catch him in rep! no -> UPVOTE. Done.

I did know, as you can see; and I am not, myself.

Yeah. I was fairly sure the suggestion would've been fine, but not 100% positive.

I think my TSL comments safely validate the assumptions about me

boboquack

12:59 AM

@ffao No, the politicians here don't bite

(Also, one of our friends in the group this was originally asked in was able to puzzle his way to the "necessary assumption" without having known. So it is possible, though "slightly dubious" may still be accurate.)

Now we just need to replace Rubio and Boboquack with a knight and a knave, and ...

10 mins ago, by Gareth McCaughan

I suggest you downvote eight of my answers to compensate.

^ lol. who starred that?

boboquack

@Rubio I'm a knave!